R.K. Agrawal, J. - (1.) The petitioner Umesh Chandra Gupta who was conductor in the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the UPSRTC) was terminated from service by the Assistant Regional Manager, Moradabad vide order dated 29.2.1984 on certain charges levelled against him. The said order was upheld in appeal by the Regional Manager, UPSRTC vide order dated 4.4.1996. However, both the orders i.e. dated 29.2.1984 and 4.4.1986 were set aside by this Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. Nil of 1987 - Umesh Chandra Gupta v. Board of Directors, U.P. State Road Transport Corporation through its Managing Director, Terhi Khothi Lucknow and others decided on 30.1.1987 by following its earlier decision in the case of Bhopal Singh v. U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and others, 1986 (53) FLR 625.
(2.) It appears that the Regional Manager Moradabad had passed fresh order on 30th July, 1987 terminating the services of the petitioner on the basis of enquiry held earlier which culminated into the order dated 29.2.1984 and was set aside subsequently by this Court. Against the order dated 30th July, 1987, passed by the Regional Manager UPSRTC, the petitioner filed appeal on 21.10.1987 before the Divisional General Manager, UPSRTC North Zone Bareilly. General Manager U.P.S.R.T.C. who vide order dated 4.5.1994 informed the petitioner that his appeal had already been decided on 1st April 1986 and, its information was given to the petitioner on 4.4.1986 and therefore no further action is required into the matter. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 4.5.1994 passed by the Divisional General Manager as also the order dated 29.2.1984 and 4.4.1986 passed by the respondents. It may be mentioned here that the order dated 30th July 1987 recites that in view of the Ordinance No. 9 of 1987 the order dated 29.2.1984 stands. The main ground of challenge is that the petitioner was not served with the copy of the enquiry report along with show cause notice before passing the termination order dated 29.2.1984 which according to the petitioner is a mandatory requirement as he was a permanent employee of the Corporation. In para 31 and 32 of the writ petition, the petitioner has made following averment: "31.That it is further to submit that the petitioner was not served with a copy of inquiry report along with show cause notice before passing of termination order dated 29.2.1984. While the same was mandatory obligation on the part of respondents as petitioner was in fact a permanent employee of the Corporation. 32. That the supply of the copy of inquiry report before passing termination order dated 29.2.1984, was also required as per C.C.A. Rule 55-A (substituted by U.P. Amendment Rule 1975). Not only this the Standing Order 27-C, of the Model Standing Orders, framed under the U.P. Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1984 also provide for affording a second opportunity of hearing before inflicting the punishment of removal or dismissal from service but in the present case, the petitioner was neither supplied with a copy of inquiry report nor was served with a copy of show cause notice before passing the impugned termination order dated 29.2.1984." In para 27 of the Counter affidavit filed by Mohammed Mumtaz, Office Assistant Grade I, Office of the Regional Manager, UPSRTC, Moradabad, the fact of non-supplying of the enquiry report is admitted. However, it is stated that there was no necessity to serve a copy of the enquiry report along with show cause notice before the passing of the order of termination order dated 29.2.1984.
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the decision of this Court, dated 29th April 1993 passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 25129 of 1991 - Sushil Kumar Singh v. Managing Director, U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Lucknow and others , in which this Court has held that the copy of the enquiry report along with show cause notice is required to be given before passing any order of punishment which is so required under the Standing Order 14-C which is applicable to the employees of UPSRTC. The learned counsel for the petitioner further relied upon the decision of this Court in Bhopal Singh II v. The Managing Director, U.P. Road Transport Corporation Lucknow and others, Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 42123 of 1992 decided on 15.2.2000 in which the judgment and order dated 29.4.1993 has been followed and the order of termination was set aside.;